Certainly can be, and economic bullying by the rich and powerful is a commonplace that we don't always recognise for what it is. It is an exercise of power in each case, the question being, is it an appropriate exercise of power?

Personally I'd prefer power to be exercised democratically, rather than according to who is biggest ugliest and most scary. Or richest and most ruthless.

Certainly can be, and economic bullying by the rich and powerful is a commonplace that we don't always recognise for what it is. It is an exercise of power in each case, the question being, is it an appropriate exercise of power?

Personally I'd prefer power to be exercised democratically, rather than according to who is biggest ugliest and most scary. Or richest and most ruthless.

Click to expand...

So all potential terminations of employment need to be put to the vote ?? It's hard enough to sack lazy, useless employees now let alone having to make it a "the tribe has spoken" moment.

Certainly can be, and economic bullying by the rich and powerful is a commonplace that we don't always recognise for what it is. It is an exercise of power in each case, the question being, is it an appropriate exercise of power?

Personally I'd prefer power to be exercised democratically, rather than according to who is biggest ugliest and most scary. Or richest and most ruthless.

Click to expand...

Reading the last part of your comment reminded me of this "Thought for the day":

Certainly can be, and economic bullying by the rich and powerful is a commonplace that we don't always recognise for what it is. It is an exercise of power in each case, the question being, is it an appropriate exercise of power?

Personally I'd prefer power to be exercised democratically, rather than according to who is biggest ugliest and most scary. Or richest and most ruthless.

Click to expand...

So all potential terminations of employment need to be put to the vote ?? It's hard enough to sack lazy, useless employees now let alone having to make it a "the tribe has spoken" moment.

Click to expand...

Haha, no not suggesting that with our current employment regimes.
However, I disagree it's hard to sack 'useless' employees now, it is actually very easy to sack useful qualified and hard-working employees, just ask ex-workers from...QANTAS, the banks, Holden, Ford, Orica, Bonds, etc etc etc, and indeed the public service which has lost 1000s of jobs in recent times with many more to go

Certainly can be, and economic bullying by the rich and powerful is a commonplace that we don't always recognise for what it is. It is an exercise of power in each case, the question being, is it an appropriate exercise of power?

Personally I'd prefer power to be exercised democratically, rather than according to who is biggest ugliest and most scary. Or richest and most ruthless.

Click to expand...

So all potential terminations of employment need to be put to the vote ?? It's hard enough to sack lazy, useless employees now let alone having to make it a "the tribe has spoken" moment.

Click to expand...

Haha, no not suggesting that with our current employment regimes.
However, I disagree it's hard to sack 'useless' employees now, it is actually very easy to sack useful qualified and hard-working employees, just ask ex-workers from...QANTAS, the banks, Holden, Ford, Orica, Bonds, etc etc etc, and indeed the public service which has lost 1000s of jobs in recent times with many more to go

Click to expand...

That's big business you're talking about. It's small business that keeps Australia moving, it's small business that employs the largest amount of people Australia wide and in small business, it IS VERY hard to sack useless, lazy workers.

You must give a person (that doesn't want the job, just the pay packet) 3 verbal warnings followed by 3 written warnings. Obviously, this can't be done in 6 consecutive days either. You may even have to pay for counselling for some of these serial pests once you do get them out.

Lazy, useless workers play the system beautifully in the world of small business. They know they have to turn up for work, but that doesn't mean they have to perform. The unions are a huge pain in the ass, and you will find most of the slack workers are great mates with union reps because they spend so much time in their offices.

Slack workers know exactly what they are entitled to, the union rules and exactly how far to stretch the boundaries.

We have had fantastic workers for 10 years and more. We pay for their holidays at the end of the year. We give them days off when they need it. (for personal problems) We go above and beyond the responsibilities of an employer to help whenever and wherever we can. In return, we are given respect, loyalty and a great work ethic by our employees. That's all we ask.

Every so often though, someone will slip through our interview system and they go bad very quickly. Once they are in, they're VERY hard to get out.

C'mon moz. Three written non-performance appraisals is all it takes unless something has dramatically changed in the last decade. Write down where they aren't meeting their agreed performance criteria, document their failings, put together a remedial plan, then sack them. Overall most employees want to be a success but those that don't it is a matter of controlling the situation. It is stressful as a manager but that is what it takes.